BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved On : 16.02.2024 Pronounced On : 15.07.2024 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN Crl.O.P(MD).No.19353 of 2019 and Crl.M.P(MD). Nos.11356 and 11358 of 2019 TAM.Abdul Jaffar ... Petitioner/2^nd Respondent Vs.

Sakilabanu ... Respondent/Petitioner PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in M.C.No.06 of 2019 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppathur and quash the proceedings initiated as against the Petitioner herein. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Arul Jenifer for M/s.KBS Law Office For Respondents : Mr.P.Venkata Subramanian

ORDER

The father-in-law of the first respondent filed this petition to quash the proceedings initiated by the respondent against him and his son under Section 125 of Cr.P.C in M.C.No.06 of 2019 on the file of learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Tirupathur.

2.The respondent married the first respondent in the M.C.No.06 of 2019 on 04.02.2016. At the time of the marriage, he was working in Saudi Arabia in Riyadh City. He came to India on leave for 45 days for marrying the respondent. After the marriage, he left the respondent in the matrimonial home and in the matrimonial home, she suffered domestic violence at the instance of the father- in-law, mother-in-law and the sister-in-law. Therefore, the father-in-law, in the month of 2016, driven her out from the matrimonial home. Thereafter, the respondent was unable to contact the first respondent, namely son of the second respondent. Hence, she was unable to maintain herself. In the said circumstances, she filed the maintenance claim petition. That being the situation, the first respondent filed a suit in O.S No.19 of 2018 seeking divorce against the petitioner and the same was ordered ex-parte. In the said circumstances, she claimed maintenance against the father-in-law and her husband. In the maintenance petition, she averred that she was unable to get the address of her husband and the second respondent namely, father-in-law, is continuously receiving the monthly payment from her husband through his account and hence, he is added as a party to pay the maintenance.

2.1.The father-in-law has filed this quash petition before this court to quash the said maintenance claim petition against him on the ground that he is not bound to pay the maintenance under 125 CRPC. Under 125 CRPC, the maintenance petition is maintainable only against her husband. Therefore, the petition filed against the father-in-law is not maintainable. Hence, he seeks for quashing the MC proceeding as against him.

3.The learned counsel for the Wife submitted that before marriage, her husband was working in the Riyadh City in Saudi Arabia. After marriage, he left India. Within 45 days, she was driven out of the matrimonial home. The husband/respondent filed a suit through his father as a power of attorney seeking divorce and had obtained ex-parte divorce and the petitioner is intentionally refusing to share her husband's place of residence in Saudi Arabia. He is receiving the salary of her husband. Therefore, in the peculiar circumstance of the case, he was added as party. After the marriage, she is not in a position to find out the address of her husband. Further, in all the proceedings, the father-in- law acted as a power of attorney of her husband. Even the suit was filed in the Munsif court, through her father-in-law as the power of attorney. Hence, in the peculiar circumstance of the case, she filed the maintenance claim against the father-in-law impleading him and seeking the maintenance through him. She further averred that he is continuously receiving amounts from her husband every month and hence he also acted as a trustee of her husband. Hence, he is duty bound to pay the maintenance amount received from his son. He only arranged the marriage of his son. Hence, he is duty bound to maintain her.

Therefore, she seeks dismissal of this